Jump to content


Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!

Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.

We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
  • Say hello and join the conversation
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Get your own profile and make new friends
  • Classifieds with all sorts of Subaru goodies
  • Photo hosting in our gallery
  • Meet other cool people with cool cars
Seriously, what are you waiting for? Make your life more fulfilling and join today! You and your Subaru won't regret it, we guarantee** it.

* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!

Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!

Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo

Minnesota Members, PLEASE HELP!


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 MorganM

MorganM

    Do you Subaru?

  • Members
  • 8,390 posts
  • TwinCities

Posted 26 October 2004 - 09:13 AM

Swift action on this is critical. Please do not delay as public comment hearings will be closed next month for these state forests.

Right now the DNR is reviewing all state forests and either marking them 'managed' or 'closed'. All forests labled closed will be completly closed. All forests labled maanged will have designated areas of use. You will only be able to go where you see a sign that says you are allowed there. Basicly if we don't stand up and say what we want now we wont get it!

Please help out by submiting comments to the below addresses. Put the points listed into your own words. Add anything you feel would help promote fair use for moterized vehicles. Written comments will be taken more seriously. Email comments are fine also.

I'm going up to Cloquet today for a public hearing with the DNR on Fon du lac and White Face River. This is how seriously I take the sport of offroading. I'm taking half of my day off at work to drive 4 hours to a public hearing about forests I'll prolly never offroad in. The point is to save public accessible roads and trails in state forests; not just to save spots *I* want to offroad at. We need more legal places to go!

I appriciate any help you may provide here, thank you!

=================================================================
SEND PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR FOND DU LAC AND WHITEFACE RIVER STATE FORESTS TO:
jim.weseloh@dnr.state.mn.us
OR
Jim Weseloh,
1201 East Highway 2,
Grand Rapids, MN 55744
-----------
Whiteface River State Forest: should not be closed, it should be classified as limited to maintain the consistency of land management policies between state forest and the county land that completely surrounds it.
-----------
In Fond du Lac State Forest: there are several trails that should be designated for trucks:
loop #1: trail segments 173, 136, 126, 119, 114, 109, 86, 16, 14, 11, 12, road segments 29, 28, 68, 98, 113, 122, 150, 151, 167.
loop #2: trail segments 359, 377, 378, 360, 325, 301, 298, 288, 284, 283, 309, 312, 327, 330, 331, 341, 342, 316.
loop #3: trail segments 289, 264, 255, 251, 243, 212, 221, 236, 250, 252, 268, 271, 277.
loop #4: road segments 249, 216, trail segments 218, 253, 273, 318, 324.
loop #5: trail segments 191, 207, 222, 226, 217, 208, 200, 190, 181, 176 (if segment 176 is a no go because of the tribal land complete the loop with segment 206 after 208 instead)
Trail segment 229 could be looped back to trail segment 253 with no problem or wetland.
The wet end of trail segment 185 can be cut off and instead looped back to the start of trail segment 229 with no problem or wetland.

==================================================================


SEND PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR SOLANA AND WEALTHWOOD STATE FORESTS TO:
jack.olson@dnr.state.mn.us
OR
Jack Olson,
1601 Minnesota Drive,
Brainerd, MN 56401
---------
Wealthwood State Forest: should be CLOSED. the entire area is wetland and we should not be offroading there.
---------
Solana State Forest: there are a few trails that should be designated for trucks:
loop #1: trail segments 60 and 58
loop #2: trail segments 399, 117, 78, 54, 124, 97, 435, 97, and back on 124.
just past trail segment 51 trail segments 124, 433, 122, 155, and 158 would also make a great truck trail for non-fullsized trucks.
trail segment 270 is a fine trail for trucks, and it gets back to what looks like a nice duck/goose hunting spot too.


#2 MorganM

MorganM

    Do you Subaru?

  • Members
  • 8,390 posts
  • TwinCities

Posted 02 November 2004 - 02:33 PM

Fon Du Lac and Whiteface River:
Send comments to:

jim.weseloh@dnr.state.mn.us
Jim Weseloh, 1201 East Highway 2, Grand Rapids,
MN 55744

A big thanks to the seven people who showed up to the meeting, the numbers made an
impact. You could see it in the surprise on the faces of the area team. More points and
arguments for making a case for the Find du Lac trails as per the public meeting:

The main message was they felt that there were other
opportunities for trails for trucks in other forests, the draft plan mentions the
Pine Co. forests as a place to go to recreate, in our comments we need to mention
that trucks did not get any trails in the Pine Co. forests so that is not an option
for us.

Then they said we will see more trails in the more northern forests alluding to no
need for trails in Fond du Lac, we need to let them know that since the population
is mostly from the Twin Cities that we need opportunities closer to us than Gilbert
and closer to us than the northern forests.

A big point to make, each of the first ten forests whose plans have gone public so
far has used the rationale that trucks don't need trails in their forest because
trucks will get trails in other forests, yet in forest after forest we keep getting
no trails, these project teams need to understand this, if every forest says you'll
get trails in another forest, by the end of the process trucks will have zero
trails.

They need to understand we can share trails with ATVs, that if they can
maintain/mitigate a trail for ATVs they can maintain a trail for truck use
especially given the lower volume of truck traffic compared to ATV traffic.

Mention that the trail segment that heads into forest from the fire tower is just
like Leaf Loop at Gilbert and if Leaf Loop is maintainable for trucks and acceptable
in terms of rutting and pooling water then it should be maintainable and acceptable
on the trail by the fire tower.

Mention that the MN4WDA has a history of volunteerism and that they can count on
people from the association to help if the DNR asks in terms of maintenance. Remind
them that we are very good at following spring closures and we have mechanisms for
spreading the news about spring closures to our membership.

Also mention that forest maps need to be made more available way earlier on in the
game if they want anyone to be able to give them input, this would be really helpful
for both sides.


#3 MorganM

MorganM

    Do you Subaru?

  • Members
  • 8,390 posts
  • TwinCities

Posted 02 November 2004 - 02:38 PM

Solana and Wealthwood:
Send comments to:
jack.olson@dnr.state.mn.us
Jack Olson, 1601 Minnesota Drive, Brainerd,
MN 56401

From the Solana publick hearing, this is what seemed to be up, we appear to have been left out of Solana for a few reasons:

1.) the original directive in this process before the June 8th memo telling them it
was imperative to find trucks opportunities was to not include trucks. Solana's
plan was done before the June 8th memo came out.

2.) no truck people came forward during the process to say they what they wanted or
that they wanted anything at all.

3.) they felt that the northern Aitkin Co. forests (Savana and Hill River) had
more, better, and funner terrain/trails to offer us anyway (which is true, but
there's no reason we can't be in Solana too)

We also learned that these guys are not just designating currently existing trails,
their maps shows trails that they want to and are planning to build, which is cool
of them.

So, what i think should be added to our Solana comments is that we want in on the
loop that they are creating for ATVs with proposed newly constructed trail segments,
the loop that they had little insets cut out and on display of, it is the loop that
will branch off with trail segment 297 to the left off of the forest road number

418, this whole loop will be just SE of the Soo Line.

In Solana State Forest there are a few trails that should be designated for
ORVs:
loop #1: trail segments 60 and 58

loop #2: trail segments 399, 117, 78, 54, 124, 97, 435, 97, and back on 124.

just past trail segment 51 trail segments 124, 433, 122, 155, and 158 would
also make a great truck trail for non-fullsized trucks.

trail segment 270 is a fine trail for trucks, and it gets back to what looks

like a nice duck/goose hunting spot too.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users